The Phoenix Federation Response to war.

[Dochartaigh]

I think they may have been better off in the long run if they had confessed to this immediately, but I don't think anyone here is going to praise mhawk for clear thinking. I do not see why TPF would have assumed ZH was still fulfilling their mandate after contact stopped. ZH was working on behalf of TPF, and if they stopped talking to TPF, I am unsure how that proves they continued their mission.

We have never declared war on GATO for any other reason than treaty obligations in all four occasions that we have been at war with GATO. GATO entered in defense of LUE in GPW and GWII, and we entered on behalf of Pacifica in GWIII and the 1V-GATO war.

Frankly, I agree with AirMe and I do not think the arguments put forth by mhawk are especially good, so my disagreement with the CB is concurrent rather than in accord. I think spying is generally wrong and I wished we could have done more when the Continuum was spying on us. I do not think what TPF did was right or defensible in any way, so much as I think an immediate declaration of war was sort of rash.

I think we can agree that there is no evidence to support TPF currently spying on Athens.

We can also agree that there is no evidence to support ZH or TPF actually did any harm to Athens.

I think we can therefore decide that there was no urgency in this situation: TPF would remain an alliance and RoK or Athens would retain the ability to attack them if negotiations were unfruitful.

it proves that TPF could not assume anything since their story is no contact was had after mid-July. thus, they could not assume that the actions were done with since the last they knew, the actions were still underway.

i remember Polaris being quite happy with the war against GATO over CK.

if spying is wrong and attempting to destroy an alliance is wrong, then how is a DoW wrong?

as for diplomacy, again, why should Athens use diplomacy when it is quite clear that TPF was more than unwilling to do so? in fact, i would bet that TPF would have been quite happy if ZH succeeded in their efforts.

the only thing that would have occurred from diplomacy is TPF being capable of hitting peacemode and not takin the punishment they deserve.

[Proko]

as in... lack of maturity??

[OOC]AirMe meant to post a certain picture, but the website had one of those 'do not steal our bandwidth' pictures, which contained a..frankly unappealing image. It was pretty obviously a mistake, and he edited it swiftly. [/OOC]

[silentkiller]

So wait a min TPF is being attacked because they intended to get an alliance to merge into Athens and then cause trouble? but what happened was that alliance gained a protectorate with Athens and then didnt do anything? I still cant figure out how this somehow is an act of war against Athens, or how TPF wronged you.

TPF did nothing that gave you a cb, they allegedly made an alliance with the intention of spying on you creating tensions but as we all know that never happened so you somehow get a cb because TPF "intended" to do something.

here you go I hope I Athens disbands in the next few months, I have come up with a brilliant scheme. nevermind it's not worth it anymore. Will I get attacked for my intention to harm you? After all I did exactly what TPF did, came up with a plan even did the first step to achieve it but then backed out for whatever reason, I am awaiting the declarations.

Also another thing that I dont understand is the main people involved in this scheme "Triton" somehow escaped athens and co wars.

[OOC] for all the people using ooc refrences this is nothing like attempted murder, more like someone is following another person with the intent of killing them but has a change of heart and doesnt follow through with. I didnt know intention to kill was a crime as well. but as we all know ooc comparisons are stupid so how about we all stop doing them.[OOC]

[Alterego]

you're a sick !@#$%^& then

You've no idea

[Archon]

While I agree with your last sentence there, is "would have done" an acceptable CB now?

Genuinely curious.

I don't think that's the crux of the CB, I'm just pointing out a flaw in the approach.

The crux was that the process was initiated (admitted to by TPF), and that it was not stopped by TPF (admitted to by TPF), and that it was designed to do harm to an alliance TPF was not at war with (show me a war between TPF and Athens during Karma please). Also, it was conducted during peace term negotiations.

[Felix von Agnu]

yes, that was a personal attack instead of an observation made off of your own words... fact is, you stated that your friends come first despite if they spied, or does who knows what else. thus you put aside your own personal code of conduct instead of living up to it. that makes it less reliable than mine, as i will live up to my personal code of conduct regardless of friendship or not.

You know nothing of my personal code of conduct. I have never put it aside. You are simply holding me to your code of conduct, which I guess I did put aside, seeing as its not my own.

As for the rest, we just seem to be going in circles, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

[D34th]

Regardless, war is a part of the Cyberverse. Athens chose to use it instead of having to wait eternally to destroy those who spied on them.

Yeah it's all a matter of chose, but don't expect to not be criticized for your choices. But I understand why war was chose instead for diplomacy, TPF was a easy target who offer no risk to those who attack them. Unhappyly in cyberverse diplomacy just work when the offenders offer risk for those who seek war.

[Goldie]

I agree with everything AirMe said on the last page.

[Homura]

I honestly can launch a defense for either side in this argument but the stupidity that TPF and friends are basing their current defense on is making it very easy to me to side with Athens.

I'm just going to say that I concur with this sentiment. It's like Great War III all over again, well, except the whining from the AEGIS side about how it isn't legitimate and that there was intent but no action didn't depend on such absurd arguments. (with the exception of NAAC of course, the real NAAC, not Jack Diorno, who actually fought and spoke with some dignity)

And yes, I would completely do the same thing as Athens if I found out someone was doing this, provided there was enough NS backing me to get away with it.

[JBone]

Your association with ZH ended apparently because of ZH, not because of TPF. You also engineered this in the middle of peace term negotiations. It's not much of a stretch to believe that this would not have ended when the war did.

No doubt, ZH backed out of the plan due to the fallout.

It was defunct before negotiations had ended.

If there was no fallout, I would think that after the war was over ZH would have returned to TPF.

[Bob]

Hey there Penguin Solaris.....we were at war with 17 different alliances and our MADP partners were at war with the ones not directly on our front.

So yea, it was all of us against all of you.

Penguins :v

And that's not how Athens or RoK viewed it, or their allies. It was viewed as you vs the 17 different alliances who declared on you/were declared on by you.

Its a matter of your own perception of the situation, and the view of Athens and RoK and their allies differs from yours.

I have no issues keeping it up, thank you.

I never doubted you did.

[Sal Paradise]

I'm conflicted. On the one hand, the CB seems dubious, but on the other hand, lol.

I liked it

Of course you did.

[tamerlane]

what has been presented by the prosecuting parties is a damnable case that is far worse than spying, its sabotage. I have, for the most part, kept TPF in high regards but low-brow tactics as has been presented is absolutely appalling. It doesn't matter when it happened as there is NO evidence that can be produced to assure that the program had ended other than the words of an alliance who deemed it prudent to organize the sabotage of another alliance, my ally.

Forgive me for not taking your word for it but there is absolutely no reason I, nor anyone else should. RoK and Athens are both justified in demanding blood instead of talk, something you seem to enjoy doing out of both sides of your mouth.

Edited December 27, 2009 by tamerlane

[Dochartaigh]

You know nothing of my personal code of conduct. I have never put it aside. You are simply holding me to your code of conduct, which I guess I did put aside, seeing as its not my own.

As for the rest, we just seem to be going in circles, so we'll have to agree to disagree.

so you had no issues with FAN or Vox spying on Q during their wars? if not, then i will cease that argument and concede that you in fact did not compromise your code of conduct.

[bigwoody]

I don't think that's the crux of the CB, I'm just pointing out a flaw in the approach.

The crux was that the process was initiated (admitted to by TPF), and that it was not stopped by TPF (admitted to by TPF), and that it was designed to do harm to an alliance TPF was not at war with (show me a war between TPF and Athens during Karma please). Also, it was conducted during peace term negotiations.

Right, so if thats all the debate just becomes the technicality of war actions during a world war against alliances you aren't officially at war with. If that is petty or not is up to the observer.

That said, if "intent to do something" is considered an acceptable CB, then I would be inclined to redeclare on any alliance I had defeated in war that didn't instantly become a serf to my alliance, as they are clearly intending long term harm.

OOC: Of course such an action is ridiculous as it would spell a sure end to the game if adopted by all, but if one was without morals or care for the health of the game as a whole, that is a perfectly legitimate course of action.

[neneko]

So wait a min TPF is being attacked because they intended to get an alliance to merge into Athens and then cause trouble? but what happened was that alliance gained a protectorate with Athens and then didnt do anything? I still cant figure out how this somehow is an act of war against Athens, or how TPF wronged you.

TPF did nothing that gave you a cb, they allegedly made an alliance with the intention of spying on you creating tensions but as we all know that never happened so you somehow get a cb because TPF "intended" to do something.

here you go I hope I Athens disbands in the next few months, I have come up with a brilliant scheme. nevermind it's not worth it anymore. Will I get attacked for my intention to harm you? After all I did exactly what TPF did, came up with a plan even did the first step to achieve it but then backed out for whatever reason, I am awaiting the declarations.

Also another thing that I dont understand is the main people involved in this scheme "Triton" somehow escaped athens and co wars.

[OOC] for all the people using ooc refrences this is nothing like attempted murder, more like someone is following another person with the intent of killing them but has a change of heart and doesnt follow through with. I didnt know intention to kill was a crime as well. but as we all know ooc comparisons are stupid so how about we all stop doing them.[OOC]

This shouldn't be this complicated. When you plan to do something you intend to do it. When you actually set your plan in motion it is not in the planning stage any more. When TPF created and planted the group that was supposed to spy and harm athens from the inside the whole thing stoped being in the planning stage. When action is being taken you're not intending to do the thing you planned any more. You're actually doing it. Failing doesn't undo anything.

[WarriorConcept]

Right, so if thats all the debate just becomes the technicality of war actions during a world war against alliances you aren't officially at war with. If that is petty or not is up to the observer.

Yup, fortunately most of Athens and Athen's allies agree it's not petty as the actions went farther than the war. And if they were at war, well then TPF should've asked Athens for peace

That said, if "intent to do something" is considered an acceptable CB, then I would be inclined to redeclare on any alliance I had defeated in war that didn't instantly become a serf to my alliance, as they are clearly intending long term harm.

The intent has always been taboo around these parts, especially when a whole plan is laid out in order to act on it.

Say I have intent to topple TORN with a micro alliance but they haven't attacked you yet, and you know I have the intent. Will you do nothing?

[Dochartaigh]

That said, if "intent to do something" is considered an acceptable CB, then I would be inclined to redeclare on any alliance I had defeated in war that didn't instantly become a serf to my alliance, as they are clearly intending long term harm.

this is the hugest stretch of what is going on as i have seen yet. this is not some random redeclaration on an alliance Athens defeated in a war for various factors:

1) Athens was not at war with TPF during the Karma war

2) TPF attempted to use ZH to spy and destroy Athens

3) nowhere was anything stated about TPF having to become an ally of Athens after the war, let alone a serf

4) TPF never came forward to tell Athens, despite how "justifiable" their actions war due to TPF being at war and Athens being at war, even though they were not at war with one another.

[Proko]

it proves that TPF could not assume anything since their story is no contact was had after mid-July. thus, they could not assume that the actions were done with since the last they knew, the actions were still underway.

i remember Polaris being quite happy with the war against GATO over CK.

if spying is wrong and attempting to destroy an alliance is wrong, then how is a DoW wrong?

as for diplomacy, again, why should Athens use diplomacy when it is quite clear that TPF was more than unwilling to do so? in fact, i would bet that TPF would have been quite happy if ZH succeeded in their efforts.

the only thing that would have occurred from diplomacy is TPF being capable of hitting peacemode and not takin the punishment they deserve.

To begin, I think a time line from someone within Zero Hour would be really helpful to this discussion. Mhawk says one thing, Athens says another, that would be very useful.

The nature of the split between ZH and TPF, as it has been corroborated by every member of TPF leadership that I have seen post, was highly personal. If Polaris asked Nueva Vida to buy tech and sell it to Polaris, and then we canceled our treaty and started hating one another, I would not assume that deal was still on. If we asked MK to match our nuke count by this date, and then we canceled our treaty, I would not assume that deal was still on (these examples are far more draconian than we would ever say to our allies). If the mandate of ZH was to destabilize Athens and TPF and ZH ceased communicating, if I was in TPF I would assume they gave that up. And even if they did not, TPF was no longer involved.

The attitude of Polaris is irrelevant to the war itself, and our leadership and our outlook has changed vastly since then. Either way, Polaris did not sign GATO's GWIII peace terms and we were not responsible for enforcing them, which was the justification for Pacifica's declaration. We were bound by the Ordinance and One Vision to assist, and at a time when we were trying to restore relations, we were happy to help.

I agree that both spying and generally attempting to destroy alliances are wrong. I think the DoW was impulsive and did not take into consideration other possibilities. Like I said, there was no urgency here, the TPF did not need to be destroyed without any consultation or diplomatic attempts. The Declaration of War is not wrong, and if TPF had actually benefited from this, or if Athens had actually been hurt by this, I would be entirely behind the war. But no one was hurt, nothing happened, and TPF's stupid plan failed completely.

I again agree with you that TPF probably would have attacked Athens if their positions were reversed. But we are talking about an alliance that not only supported the attack on Ordo Verde (I think) but also supported the attack on Hyperion. Generally speaking, their capacity for making good decisions seems to be pretty limited, which is further corroborated by this whole debacle. Nonetheless, I do not think they should be on the receiving end of their own tyrannical policies. I was someone that believed in the change in the world view after the Karma War that was sort of destroyed by the Athens-Knights of Ni affair, that Karma was not about ideals but instead politics. The pre-Karma world staged these sort of stunts, beatdowns over outdated information or contrived scandals. I still hope the post-Karma world is more based on reason.

I think the peacemode function is pretty stupid and its consequences should be more severe for nations that enter it. I think its existence alters the foreign affairs of this game as they would otherwise exist in a negative way, and I think that if the peace mode function did not exist, Athens and Ragnarok would have been more likely to try diplomacy.

[JBone]

I don't think that's the crux of the CB, I'm just pointing out a flaw in the approach.

The crux was that the process was initiated (admitted to by TPF), and that it was not stopped by TPF (admitted to by TPF), and that it was designed to do harm to an alliance TPF was not at war with (show me a war between TPF and Athens during Karma please). Also, it was conducted during peace term negotiations.

Cmon.....are you really going to elawer and say that TPF was not at war with the entire Karma side?

We surrendered to the forces of Karma....no?

[Merrie Melodies]

When one creates a sleeper cell and deploys the sleeper cell it remains a active operation until that sleeper cell is recalled, destroyed or exposed.

This sleeper was never recalled, destroyed or exposed.

Just because the sleeper cell and its handler had a fall out doesn't negate the fact that it was a sleeper cell.

[bigwoody]

The intent has always been taboo around these parts, especially when a whole plan is laid out in order to act on it.

Say I have intent to topple TORN with a micro alliance but they haven't attacked you yet, and you know I have the intent. Will you do nothing?

Depends. Probably yes.

Now, if you intended in the past to do something but never did? Good question. Probably not.

A good measure of a CB is if it would be used with victory not assured. Would this war have been started without victory assured?

[bigwoody]

this is the hugest stretch of what is going on as i have seen yet. this is not some random redeclaration on an alliance Athens defeated in a war for various factors:

1) Athens was not at war with TPF during the Karma war

2) TPF attempted to use ZH to spy and destroy Athens

3) nowhere was anything stated about TPF having to become an ally of Athens after the war, let alone a serf

4) TPF never came forward to tell Athens, despite how "justifiable" their actions war due to TPF being at war and Athens being at war, even though they were not at war with one another.

I'm not saying it is, however, if the intent CB is valid, thats a reasonable next step. Reading the whole post for context is good for you.

EDIT: You're also assuming I'm somehow out to defend TPF. I don't really like TPF, I'm more curious as to what people find to be justifiable and not, and the beginning of a curbstomp is always a gold mine for candid moments.

Edited December 27, 2009 by bigwoody

[silentkiller]

This shouldn't be this complicated. When you plan to do something you intend to do it. When you actually set your plan in motion it is not in the planning stage any more. When TPF created and planted the group that was supposed to spy and harm athens from the inside the whole thing stoped being in the planning stage. When action is being taken you're not intending to do the thing you planned any more. You're actually doing it. Failing doesn't undo anything.

Yes but at no point did it affect Athens and co in anyway, they were not wronged in anyway. They are declaring this because TPF took a few steps that did not affect Athen in any shape. All TPF did was create a new alliance(which some people disagree with anyway.

and again with my hypothetical rogue situation: "I am planning to go rogue on Athens and have bought a few soldiers for this purpose am I now a target because I planned something and then set it into motion.

Also a few of TPF's allies are intenting to attack you, I am sure that enough cb for you to pre empt them right?

Edited December 27, 2009 by silentkiller

[WarriorConcept]

Depends. Probably yes.

Now, if you intended in the past to do something but never did? Good question. Probably not.

A good measure of a CB is if it would be used with victory not assured. Would this war have been started without victory assured?

I told the alliance to get close and eventually do its damage. Getting close obviously takes time and so they really wouldn't need to be micro managed for most of it. If I never call them back and tell them the plan is off, how will you know if my intent ceased to exist?

Also the last part is pretty obvious, you fight every war hoping to win. Just because it happens that Athens have a lot of good allies is not their fault, why should they handicap themselves?